Allowed

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Feb 2021ABA/81/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant in connection with a cheque bounce and cheating case was allowed subject to conditions. The court directed that the applicant must attend the police station as and when called and cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant granted bail on Rs.25,000 bond to be released if arrested; directed to attend police station and cooperate with investigation.

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

32-ABA-81-2021.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 81 OF 2021

¶4

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed	.... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra	.... Respondent

¶5

Mr. N.R. Bubna, for the applicant. Mrs. J.S. Lohokare, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶6

CORAM:SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :5^th FEBRUARY 2021

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.461/2020 dated 24.12.2020 registered at Killa Police Station, Nashik Rural under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

The FIR is lodged by one Tamilselvan Periyaswami. He has stated that he wanted to purchase textile machines for which he came to Malegaon. He met the present Applicant there. The informant was y.s.patil 1 of 4

¶10

1 of 4

¶11

32-ABA-81-2021.odt

¶12

accompanied by his two friends. The Applicant took them to the factory of one Pushpak Jakhotia. The informant decided to purchase 36 machines from Jakhotia. For initial transaction, he was asked to pay certain amount. Rs.6 Lakhs were paid in cash to one Shankar Singh, who in turn told the informant to deposit other amount in the account of the Applicant’s frm. There are allegations that in all Rs.27 Lakhs were paid by the informant, out of which around Rs.10 Lakhs have come in the frm’s account of the Applicant.

¶13

Heard Mr. N.R. Bubna, for the applicant and Mrs. J.S. Lohokare, APP for the State.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that out of the amount received by him, the Applicant has returned around Rs.4 Lakhs and the balance amount of Rs.6 Lakhs was also to be returned by co-accused Kalayarasan. The frst informant has executed an affidavit to that eff e ct which is annexed to this

y.s.patil

2 of 4

32-ABA-81-2021.odt

Application.

On the last occasion, I had directed learned APP

¶20

to take instructions to verify the above claim of the applicant. Today, investigating Officer is present in the Court.

¶21

6. Learned APP on instructions states that the frst

¶22

informant has not approached the Police and has not cooperated with the investigation. In this view of the matter, there is no reason at this stage, to doubt the applicant’s claim that he had paid Rs. 4 lakhs to the frst informant and the frst informant was supposed to recover the balance of Rs. 6 lakhs from Kalayarasan i.e. accused No. 2. The affidavit to that eff e ct was executed by the frst informant on 1//12/2020. A copy of the same is at page 1/ of the memo. The FIR is lodged subsequently on 24/12/2020.

¶23

In this view of the matter, the applicant can be

y.s.patil

3 of 4

32-ABA-81-2021.odt

protected by order of anticipatory bail. However, he will have to attend the concerned Police Station and to cooperate with the investigation.

¶28

/. Hence the following order.

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R. No. 461 of 2020 registered with Killa Police Station, Nashik Rural, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶31

(ii) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called and shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶32

(iii) The Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶34

y.s.patil

¶35

4 of 4

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Shivaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sujata Manik Salunkhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dattatray @ Datta Balu Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kuchya @ Vishal Anantya @ Popat Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra